The Putaruru Press PUBLISHED EVERY THURSDAY Phone 28 P.O. Box 44 Office Oxford Place THURSDAY, MARCH 2, 1933. TWO BLACKS-.

Putaruru Press, Volume XI, Issue 511, 2 March 1933, Page 4

The Putaruru Press PUBLISHED EVERY THURSDAY Phone 28 P.O. Box 44 Office Oxford Place THURSDAY, MARCH 2, 1933. TWO BLACKS-.

TWO blacks do not make a white, and the resort to a stonewall by the Labour Party in its opposition to the Sales Tax does not justify the Prime Minister’s intimation of a more frequent use of Orders-in-Council. Very little can be said in favour of “ stonewalls.” Over the Sales Tax it could serve no good purpose, unless it had been to put forward an alternative. For the Sales Tax there is no approval as a matter of choice, but it had to be accepted as a corollary of the increase of the exchange. But before Mr. Forbes rebuked the Opposition he should have considered whether the way in which the measure was handled did not justify exception being taken. It was an involved and complicated Bill and to endeavour to force it through from the second reading to committee in one sitting could not be regarded as reasonable. The Bill was of the greatest importance to the business community, and the Government showed little consideration to this section of the cpmmunity in its attempt to force it through. As it is at present little information can be obtained from the authorities as to the working of the measure. The Bill bore obvious traces of haste in preparation, and the Government should have been prepared to allow time for the House to consider it.

Objection was taken to clause 41, which provided that

Every attempt to commit an offence against this Act shall be an offence punishable in a like manner as if the offence so attempted had been actually committed.

Such a clause is capable of dangerous abuse, and the recognition of this was evidenced by the Minister, when he attempted to make a bargain with the Labour Party to scrap this clause if the Opposition would pass the next 14 clauses without debate. If the Government attached little importance to the clause or realised that it was dangerous, then it should have acted. But to offer a clause containing a vital principle for public political sale at a price of a few hours’ silence is a cynical reflection on the Government’s legislative methods.

A “ stonewall ” may waste time, fray tempers and cost the country unnecessary money, but in the worst and most unjustified form it is not as dangerous as government by Order-in-Council.